Scope Infection Lawsuit Patients across the United States have filed medical scope infection lawsuits after contaminated endoscopes and duodenoscopes allegedly transmitted dangerous bacterial infections during procedures such as ERCP, colonoscopy, and other endoscopic treatments.
Spinal Cord Stimulator Lawsuit Spinal cord stimulator lawsuits allege that implanted pain devices malfunctioned, migrated, or caused nerve damage, often forcing patients to undergo revision or removal surgery.
Chlorpyrifos Parkinsonโs Disease Lawsuit Chlorpyrifos lawsuits are being investigated for individuals diagnosed with Parkinsonโs disease after direct, residential, occupational or Gulf War pesticide exposure.
Ozempic Lawsuit Lawyers are pursuing Ozempic lawsuits, Wegovy lawsuits and Mounjaro lawsuits over gastroparesis or stomach paralysis, which can leave users with long-term gastrointestinal side effects
Suboxone Tooth Decay Lawsuit Lawsuits are being pursued by users of Suboxone who experienced tooth loss, broken teeth or required dental extractions. Settlement benefits may be available.
Depo-Provera Lawsuit Depo-Provera lawsuits are being investigated for women who developed meningioma brain tumors after receiving Depo-Provera birth control shots, claiming that Pfizer failed to adequately disclose side effects.
Hair Relaxer Lawsuit Regular exposure to chemicals in hair relaxer may cause uterine cancer, ovarian cancer and other injuries. Women diagnosed with cancer may be eligible for settlement benefits.
Nitrous Oxide Lawsuit Individuals who suffered harm, or families who lost a loved one after using nitrous oxide products may be eligible for financial compensation through a nitrous oxide lawsuit.
Breast Mesh Lawsuit Lawyers are investigating breast mesh lawsuits for women who suffered infections, pain, or implant failure from internal bra implants used in breast reconstruction surgery.
Bard PowerPort Lawsuit Serious and life-threatening injuries have been linked to problems with Bard PowerPort. Lawsuits are now being pursued by individuals who suffered injuries from the implantable port catheter fracturing or migrating.
Generic Drug Makers’ Push Back Against Warning Requirements February 20, 2014 Irvin Jackson Add Your CommentsIn response to proposed regulations that would make generic drug makers responsible for providing complete and updated label warnings about potential health risks associated with medications they manufacture and sell, the generic manufacturers are pushing back and indicate that it would cause confusion and increased costs.Generic drug manufactuers have released a new economic analysis (PDF) of the costs associated with forcing them to adequately warn consumers about drug side effects, which may also restore the ability for consumers to pursue failure to warn lawsuits against generic drug makers when they suffer injuries that may have been prevented had appropriate warnings been provided.The pharmaceutical companies are pushing back against a proposed FDA rule that would close a loophole created by the Supreme Court, which has allowed generic drug makers to avoid responsibility for injuries caused by medications they sell, even if they are aware the drugs contain dangerous side effects that are not adequately disclosed to consumers and the medical community.Do You Know about…Spinal Cord Stimulator lawsuitsSpinal cord stimulator lawsuits are being investigated for individuals who suffered unnecessary shocks, burns or other problems, often resulting in the need for additional surgery to remove the SCS.Learn MoreSEE IF YOU QUALIFY FOR COMPENSATIONDo You Know AboutโฆSpinal Cord Stimulator lawsuitsSpinal cord stimulator lawsuits are being investigated for individuals who suffered unnecessary shocks, burns or other problems, often resulting in the need for additional surgery to remove the SCS.Learn MoreSEE IF YOU QUALIFY FOR COMPENSATIONCurrently regulations require that generic drugs contain the same warning label that is provided on the brand name version of the medication, even if the manufacturer knows or reasonably should know that serious health risks associated with the drugs are not disclosed by the brand name manufacturer. This has caused many older drugs to be sold for years after potentially life-threatening health problems are discovered, especially when brand name versions are no longer manufactured.Generic drug makers have relied on this restriction on their ability to update warnings as a shield against product liability lawsuits filed by consumers who allege they suffered an injury due to their failure to warn about known side effects. Known as pre-emption, the Supreme Court upheld this defense in the controversial 2011 ruling of Pliva v. Mensing, in which a split court ruled 5-4 down ideological lines that state failure to warn lawsuits are preempted by the federal regulations that require generic drugs contain the same warnings.The impact of this ruling has left consumers without a recourse for serious and often devastating injuries caused by medications with known side effects that are no disclosed by the drug makers. Consumers are unable to pursue damages against the brand name manufacturers since they did not use their product, and any failure to warn lawsuits against generic drug makers are now barred. This has resulted in the dismissal of hundreds of Reglan lawsuits, Accutane lawsuits, Fosamax lawsuits and other claims where the plaintiffs only used the generic equivalent.The new proposed FDA regulations would allow generic drug makers to update label warnings and safety information for their drugs, but the industry says such a move would be a mistake. According to a press release issued by the Generic Pharmaceutical Association, the industry representatives have indicated that holding pharmaceutical manufacturers responsible for updating warnings about known risks “would be nothing short of catastrophic.”The Generic Pharmaceutical Association had a consulting form known as Matrix Global Advisors conduct an analysis of the cost of the new rule, which claims that it would add $4 billion to the cost of national healthcare. The association claims that they would be forced to make consumers pay more for their drugs if they were made liable for providing adequate drug side effect warning. They also claim the rule would lead to multiple drug labels for the same drugs, causing confusion among consumers. The generic drug makers indicate that another solution, one that does not require them to be held liable for warning patients about the side effects of their drugs, would be more sensible.However, the FDA rejected those arguments in its proposed rulemaking. While generic companies claim the rule would allow them to change the labels without FDA approval, the FDA says that its new rules would include FDA review and approval of those label changes.The position taken by the generic drug makers also does not account for the huge costs associated with the injuries caused by generic drugs, which may be avoided if proper warnings are provided. However, the generic drug makers prefer to continue generating profits from their medications without being responsible for the safety of consumers.In August 2011, the prominent consumer advocacy group Public Citizen filed a petition with the FDA calling for the agency toย amend the federal regulations that limit generic drug makersโ ability to update warning labels. The group indicated that the outdated regulations prevent consumers from learning about many known risks associated with generic drugs and has become a shield for pharmaceutical companies againstย product liability lawsuits. Written by: Irvin JacksonSenior Legal Journalist & Contributing EditorIrvin Jackson is a senior investigative reporter at AboutLawsuits.com with more than 30 years of experience covering mass tort litigation, environmental policy, and consumer safety. He previously served as Associate Editor at Inside the EPA and contributes original reporting on product liability lawsuits, regulatory failures, and nationwide litigation trends. Tags: Drug Side Effects, Generic Drug, Supreme CourtMore Lawsuit Stories AngioDynamics SmartPort Infection Lawsuit Alleges Defective Port Caused Sepsis August 7, 2026 Lawsuit Alleges SteriCare Solution Caused Sepsis, Wrongful Death August 7, 2026 AirTag Lawsuit Claims Apple Tracking Devices Used to Stalk Woman August 7, 2026 1 Comments Patricia March 14, 2014 If generics are supposed to be the same as the brand, why is this different labeling necessary. It is just another way for Brand Manufacturers to cause problems for the generic manufacturers. I have a question, why are certain 20 and 30 year old generic’s prices being raised 20 to 30%. This will cause senior citizens to go into the “doughnut” hole sooner. What happened to medicine getting cheaper as it gets older. The FDA seems to let drug companies get away with anything. Are you there for them or the consumer? CompanyThis field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.Share Your CommentsFirst Name*Last NameEmail* Shared Comments*This field is hidden when viewing the formI authorize the above comments be posted on this page Yes NoPost Comment I authorize the above comments be posted on this pageWeekly Digest Opt-In Yes, send me a weekly email with the latest lawsuits, recalls and warnings.Want your comments reviewed by a lawyer?To have an attorney review your comments and contact you about a potential case, provide your contact information below. This will not be published.Contact Phone #Alt Phone #Private CommentsNOTE: Providing information for review by an attorney does not form an attorney-client relationship.CAPTCHAGA SourceGA CampaignGA MediumGA ContentGA TermΔ MORE TOP STORIES AngioDynamics SmartPort Infection Lawsuit Alleges Defective Port Caused Sepsis (Posted: yesterday)A Pennsylvania man has filed an AngioDynamics SmartPort lawsuit alleging catheter defects promoted bacterial growth, causing a severe infection and sepsis only weeks after implantation.MORE ABOUT: ANGIODYNAMICS PORT CATHETER LAWSUITPort Catheter Sepsis Lawsuit Claims Defective SmartPort Implant Caused Infection (07/22/2026)SmartPort Catheter Lawsuit Claims Defective AngioDynamics Port-a-Cath Caused Infection (07/14/2026)Vortex Port Lawsuit Claims Defective AngioDynamics Device Caused Infection, Pulmonary Embolism (07/07/2026) Lawsuit Over Spinal Cord Stimulator Removal Claims Device Caused Numbness, Incontinence (Posted: 2 days ago)An Alabama woman has filed a lawsuit alleging a Boston Scientific spinal cord stimulator failed to relieve her chronic pain, instead causing complications that ultimately required surgery to remove the entire system.MORE ABOUT: SPINAL CORD STIMULATOR LAWSUITSpine Stimulator Injury Lawyers Seek Leadership Roles in Boston Scientific MDL (07/31/2026)Spinal Cord Stimulator Reprogramming Caused Electric Shocks, Worsening Pain: Lawsuit (07/27/2026)Abbott Faces Spine Stimulator Lawsuit Brought Jointly by 17 Injured Patients (07/23/2026) Covidien Hernia Mesh Lawsuit Payout of $88M Awarded in First MDL Bellwether Trial (Posted: 3 days ago)The first Covidien hernia mesh bellwether trial has ended in an $88 million verdict for the plaintiff, who suffered bowel resectioning and revision surgery after his Symbotex hernia mesh failed.MORE ABOUT: HERNIA MESH LAWSUITHernia Mesh Failure Lawsuit Alleges ProGrip Implant Was Prone to Breaking and Fragmenting (08/03/2026)Bard Composix Kugel Hernia Mesh Lawsuit Claims Defective Implant Required Bowel Resection (07/27/2026)First Covidien Hernia Mesh Lawsuit Trial Over Symbotex Problems To Begin Next Week (07/10/2026)
AngioDynamics SmartPort Infection Lawsuit Alleges Defective Port Caused Sepsis (Posted: yesterday)A Pennsylvania man has filed an AngioDynamics SmartPort lawsuit alleging catheter defects promoted bacterial growth, causing a severe infection and sepsis only weeks after implantation.MORE ABOUT: ANGIODYNAMICS PORT CATHETER LAWSUITPort Catheter Sepsis Lawsuit Claims Defective SmartPort Implant Caused Infection (07/22/2026)SmartPort Catheter Lawsuit Claims Defective AngioDynamics Port-a-Cath Caused Infection (07/14/2026)Vortex Port Lawsuit Claims Defective AngioDynamics Device Caused Infection, Pulmonary Embolism (07/07/2026)
Lawsuit Over Spinal Cord Stimulator Removal Claims Device Caused Numbness, Incontinence (Posted: 2 days ago)An Alabama woman has filed a lawsuit alleging a Boston Scientific spinal cord stimulator failed to relieve her chronic pain, instead causing complications that ultimately required surgery to remove the entire system.MORE ABOUT: SPINAL CORD STIMULATOR LAWSUITSpine Stimulator Injury Lawyers Seek Leadership Roles in Boston Scientific MDL (07/31/2026)Spinal Cord Stimulator Reprogramming Caused Electric Shocks, Worsening Pain: Lawsuit (07/27/2026)Abbott Faces Spine Stimulator Lawsuit Brought Jointly by 17 Injured Patients (07/23/2026)
Covidien Hernia Mesh Lawsuit Payout of $88M Awarded in First MDL Bellwether Trial (Posted: 3 days ago)The first Covidien hernia mesh bellwether trial has ended in an $88 million verdict for the plaintiff, who suffered bowel resectioning and revision surgery after his Symbotex hernia mesh failed.MORE ABOUT: HERNIA MESH LAWSUITHernia Mesh Failure Lawsuit Alleges ProGrip Implant Was Prone to Breaking and Fragmenting (08/03/2026)Bard Composix Kugel Hernia Mesh Lawsuit Claims Defective Implant Required Bowel Resection (07/27/2026)First Covidien Hernia Mesh Lawsuit Trial Over Symbotex Problems To Begin Next Week (07/10/2026)